A comparison of intermittent and continuous support during labor: A meta-analysis

97Citations
Citations of this article
58Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Our goal was to contrast the influence of intermittent and continuous support provided by doulas during labor and delivery on 5 childbirth outcomes. Data were aggregated across 11 clinical trials by means of meta- analytic techniques. Continuous support, when compared with no doula support, was significantly associated with shorter labors (weighted mean difference - 1.64 hours, 95% confidence interval -2.3 to -.96) and decreased need for the use of any analgesia (odds ratio .64, 95% confidence interval .49 to .85). oxytocin (odds ratio .29, 95% confidence interval .20 to .40), forceps (odds ratio .43, 95% confidence interval .28 to .65), and cesarean sections (odds ratio .49, 95% confidence interval .37 to .65). Intermittent support was not significantly associated with any of the outcomes. Odds ratios differed between the 2 groups of studies for each outcome. Continuous support appears to have a greater beneficial impact on the 5 outcomes than intermittent support. Future clinical trials, however, will need to control for possible confounding influences. Implications for labor management are discussed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Scott, K. D., Berkowitz, G., & Klaus, M. (1999). A comparison of intermittent and continuous support during labor: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 180(5), 1054–1059. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(99)70594-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free